Pages

Thursday, March 31, 2011

To those who think that buying food in the corner deli is becoming a luxury, we have five words: you ain't seen nuthin' yet. U.S. consumers face "serious" inflation in the months ahead for clothing, food and other products, the head of Wal-Mart's U.S. operations warned Wednesday talking to USA Today. And if Wal-Mart which is at the very bottom of commoditized consumer retail, and at the very peak of avoiding reexporting of US inflation by way of China is concerned, it may be time to panic, or at least cancel those plane tickets to Zimbabwe, which is soon coming to us.

By Captain Eric H. May
HOUSTON, 3/31/11 — Alarmed military intelligence contacts alerted me yesterday to this disturbing story out of Chicago’s CBS affiliate: Threats Claim Nuclear Bombs Hidden All Over U.S.

It’s a haunting echo of what Charles Krauthammer, the Neocon Dr. Strangelove, wrote in his July 9, 2004 column, Blixful Amnesia. He denounced America for being led astray by an emerging 9/11 Truth movement. We had forgotten the “existential threat” of Muslim terror, he admonished, and he prophesied firey retribution for our transgression:

“There is no gradualness and there are no countermeasures to a dozen nuclear warheads detonating simultaneously in U.S. cities. … A serious, coordinated attack on the United States using weapons of mass destruction could so shatter America as a functioning, advanced society that it would take generations to rebuild.”

On September 24, 2004, he pushed the same message with In Defense of Democratic Realism:

“Imagine what just a handful of the world’s loose nukes, detonated simultaneously in New York, Washington, Chicago and just a few other cities, would do to the United States. … If that is not an existential threat, nothing is.”

The same kind of thinking motivated Stu Bykofski, Krauthammer’s fellow Neocon, to write his zealous August 9, 2007 column, To save America, we need another 9/11:

“One month from The Anniversary, I’m thinking another 9/11 would help America. What kind of a sick bastard would write such a thing? A bastard so sick of how we … have forgotten who the enemy is: global terrorists who use Islam to justify their hideous sins, including blowing up women and children.”

On February 26, 2009, another notorious Neocon, Bushman John Bolton, joined the crazed chorus advocating atomic annihilation as a cure-all for war-weariness. It was documented by a Mother Jones article, John Bolton at CPAC: The Benefits of Nuking Chicago:

“Appearing at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), the nation’s largest annual conference of conservative activists, Bolton, one of the hardest hardliners of the George W. Bush administration, cracked a joke about the nuking of Obama’s hometown.”

All of this brings us back to the present peril of being multi-nuked by an increasingly isolated and desperate Israel, aided by its fifth columnists, doing what it does best: back-stabbing an allied nation, then blaming it on Muslims. With Mossad Mayor Rahm Emanuel newly installed in control of Chicago, is it really surprising that this predictive programming story originated there?

Three of the six nuclear reactors at Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant have partially melted down and plutonium is seeping into the soil outside. Plutonium is less volatile than other radioactive elements like iodine or cesium, but it's also more deadly. According to Business Week, "When plutonium decays, it emits what is known as an alpha particle, a relatively big particle that carries a lot of energy. When an alpha particle hits body tissue, it can damage the DNA of a cell and lead to a cancer-causing mutation." If plutonium leaches into groundwater or pristine aquifers, the threat to public health and the environment will be extreme.

This is an excerpt from an article in the Guardian:

"The radioactive core in a reactor at the crippled Fukushima nuclear power plant appears to have melted through the bottom of its containment vessel and on to a concrete floor, experts say, raising fears of a major release of radiation at the site. The warning follows an analysis by a leading US expert of radiation levels at the plant....

“Richard Lahey, who was head of safety research for boiling-water reactors at General Electric when the company installed the units at Fukushima, told the Guardian workers at the site appeared to have "lost the race" to save the reactor..." ("Japan may have lost race to save nuclear reactor", The Guardian)

It also appears that underground tunnels at the facility have been flooded with radioactive water that contains high-concentrations of caesium-137. A considerable amount of the water has made its way to the sea where samples show the levels of contamination steadily rising. This is from the Wall Street Journal:

"Levels of radiation in the ocean next to the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant have surged to record highs, the government said Wednesday, as operators try to deal with large amounts of radioactive water—the unwanted byproduct of operations to cool the reactors.

“The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency said water taken Tuesday afternoon from the monitoring location for the troubled reactors Nos. 1 to 4 had 3,355 times the permitted concentration of iodine-131. That is the highest yet recorded at the sampling location, which is 330 meters south of the reactors' discharge outlet." ("Seawater Radiation Level Soars Near Plant", Wall Street Journal)

All fishing has been banned in the vicinity as the toxins pose a danger to human health.

The Japanese government's chief spokesman, Yukio Edano, issued a public statement admitting that the situation at Fukushima is progressively getting worse with no end in sight. "We are not yet in a situation where we can say when we will have this under control," said Edano. In other words, the emergency effort is failing.

The fact that Japan is experiencing what’s shaping up to be one of the biggest environmental catastrophe in history explains why the media have been trying so hard to divert the public's attention to Obama's military adventure in Libya. But it hasn't worked; all eyes are locked on Fukushima where the crisis continues to get more precarious by the day. News anchors assure their viewers that they are only being exposed to "safe levels of radioactivity", but people aren't buying it. They've seen the comparisons to Chernobyl and made their own judgements. Here's an excerpt from an article in Counterpunch by Chris Busby that gives a thumbnail sketch of the human costs of the meltdown at Chernobyl:

"The health effects of the Chernobyl accident are massive and demonstrable. They have been studied by many research groups in Russia, Belarus and the Ukraine, in the USA, Greece, Germany, Sweden, Switzerland and Japan. The scientific peer reviewed literature is enormous. Hundreds of papers report the effects, increases in cancer and a range of other diseases. My colleague Alexey Yablokov of the Russian Academy of Sciences, published a review of these studies in the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences (2009). Earlier in 2006 he and I collected together reviews of the Russian literature by a group of eminent radiation scientists and published these in the book Chernobyl, 20 Years After. The result: more than a million people have died between 1986 and 2004 as a direct result of Chernobyl."

One million dead, that's the bottom line. And, according to Busby, "we can already calculate that the contamination (at Fukushima) is actually worse than Chernobyl."

Beware of Homeland Security Training for Local Law Enforcement, by An InsiderJames Wesley, Rawles

I’ve been in law enforcement for the past 18 years. I have attended a variety of training over those years. During the 1990s, most training I attended was community-oriented, sponsored by local agencies or private companies specializing in police training. Themes common to training of the past included topics such as Constitutional rights, community partnerships, youth-oriented programs and problem-oriented policing.

During the past several years, I have witnessed a dramatic shift in the focus of law enforcement training. Law enforcement courses have moved away from a local community focus to a federally dominated model of complete social control. Most training I have attended over the past two years have been sponsored by Department of Homeland Security (DHS), namely the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

No matter what topic the training session concerns, every DHS sponsored course I have attended over the past few years never fails to branch off into warnings about potential domestic terrorists in the community. While this may sound like a valid officer and community safety issue, you may be disturbed to learn how our Federal government describes a typical domestic terrorist.

These federal trainers describe the dangers of “extremists” and “militia groups” roaming the community and hiding in plain sight, ready to attack. Officers are instructed how to recognize these domestic terrorists by their behavior, views and common characteristics. State data bases are kept to track suspected domestic terrorists and officers are instructed on reporting procedures to state and federal agencies. The state I work in, like many others, have what is known as a “fusion center” that compiles a watch list of suspicious people.

So how does a person qualify as a potential domestic terrorist? Based on the training I have attended, here are characteristics that qualify:

A recent training session I attended encouraged law enforcement agencies to work with business owners to alert police when customers appear to be stockpiling items. An example was given that a federal agent was monitoring customers at a well known hunting and fishing retail outlet and noting who was purchasing certain items. This is something to remember the next time you purchase a case of ammo at one of these popular outdoor sports retail stores.

Methods of developing evidence of terrorist activity from virtually any search have also been discussed. Various common materials which may be associated with homemade explosives are listed, such as lengths of pipe, gunpowder, matches, flammable liquids and fireworks. Officers are told when these items are found, they can be listed as “bomb making materials”. The training even goes so far as to instruct officers that the items are cleverly disguised as legitimate, such as gasoline stored near a lawn mower, pipes stored in a shop building or gunpowder stored with reloading materials.

One course I attended used the example of a person employed as a plumber being the target of a search warrant. In this example, the officers were told how to use his employment as a plumber as further evidence of terrorism. The suspect’s employment would be described as an elaborate scheme to justify possessing pipes and chemicals so as to have bomb making materials readily available. Based on this example, all plumbers are potential pipe bomb makers. All gun dealers are plotting to provide arms to gangs or terrorists. All pest control companies are preparing mass poisonings. By using this logic, simply having the ability to do something criminal automatically makes the person guilty of plotting the crime. With all the various methods of manufacturing methamphetamine, it would also be easy to claim that a disassembled clandestine drug lab was located during the search. In other words, it is easy to frame anyone for possessing bomb making materials (or other crimes) if the officer knows what items to list in the report and how to link these items to terrorism.

What the Patriot Act Does For You
by Philip Giraldi
Incessant warmaking overseas will someday end when the United States runs out of money or soldiers or both. But less well understood is the collateral damage here at home where the consequences of the global war on terror will linger on in the form of a shattered constitution. The Patriot Act is generally promoted as the principal legislative tool being used to fight international terrorism. It is, in reality, a devastating and poorly conceived bit of legislation originally approved just after 9/11. It will soon be up for an extension in the US Senate. President Barack Obama, who criticized it while he was a candidate but apparently has had a change of heart since that time, favors its renewal. Most members of Congress, few of whom have ever read the entire act, want it renewed. The mainstream media likes it because who can resist patriotism?

That is the bad news. But there is also some good news. Libertarians, traditional conservatives, progressives, and even some tea partiers are for the first time uniting to stop the extension. Senator Rand Paul led the charge in the Senate back in February, resulting in a temporary 90 day continuation of key provisions of the act that will expire in May. Before that happens, the Patriot Act will again be up for Senatorial approval but this time there will be an open debate in front of the full Senate and under the scrutiny of the media. It will be the first time that has happened since 2001. There will also be a roll call vote with each Senator having to come down for or against. It is an opportunity not to be missed to roll back the tide of government intrusion in the life of every citizen.

Americans should know what the Patriot Act has done to each and every one of us. Broadly speaking, the Patriot Act was designed to make it easier for law enforcement to investigate US citizens and permanent residents by easing legal restraints on records and activities that were hitherto considered private or required a judge’s order to access. The Act has enjoyed bipartisan support since 2001.

Title 2 of the Patriot Act, entitled “Enhanced Surveillance Procedures,” contains many of its most controversial aspects of the new law. Previously, obtaining information on foreigners residing in the United States was carefully regulated by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court and the information generally had to be sought as part of an actual criminal investigation. Under the new law, it became possible to investigate any foreign suspect as part of a law enforcement effort to obtain foreign intelligence information even if there was no evidence that a crime had been committed. The difference is critical as the former procedure required actual evidence of a crime while the new procedure permitted investigation of just about anyone who could plausibly be linked to a foreign suspect to obtain information, allowing law enforcement to conduct wide ranging fishing expeditions. The new rules also lifted the requirement that law enforcement demonstrate that the target of a FISA approved investigation was a foreign national and a possible agent of a foreign government. Anyone linked to the inquiry, even a US citizen, could become a person of interest.

Title 2 also permitted any district court in the United States to issue surveillance orders and search warrants in connection with proposed terrorist investigations and the Act specifically included electronic communications and voicemail records as subject to the warrants. Using the warrants, the FBI is able to access from the internet service provider all records on a user, to include name, address, telephone billing records, session details, and payment information to include bank and credit card records.

Roving wiretaps are also authorized by the Patriot Act, permitting law enforcement to obtain warrants that allow them to switch from one communications medium to another if they believe that the target is changing his method of communication to make monitoring him more difficult. This means that the FBI is empowered to tap multiple phones or computer lines simultaneously based on one blanket warrant. Previously law enforcement had to show cause for the tap and it was limited to the telephone or computer line specified in the request. Under Title 2 the FBI was also permitted to obtain whatever tangible public records are available to assist in an investigation. This was the so-called library clause, where library borrowing records could be accessed by the police.

Title 4 and Title 8 of the Patriot Act deal with defining terrorism. The definition was broadened to include many criminal acts hitherto regarded as non-terrorism, to include mass destruction, assassination, kidnapping, intimidation, coercion, and racketeering. It also includes activities “dangerous to human life.” The definition of terrorist support activity was also made extremely broad and elastic, meaning that even a letter to the editor defending a terrorist group or the inadvertent contribution to a charity that was somehow linked to a group that the State Department had defined as terrorist could lead to criminal prosecution. Under the new law, any alien, including legal residents, who is arrested on terrorist related charges can be detained indefinitely under orders from the Attorney General. The evidence used to determine that the accused had possible links to terrorist organizations can be withheld at the discretion of the Justice Department and cannot be challenged, which means that it can be based on suspicion or uncorroborated information. There is no guarantee of any kind of due process for those who are arrested.

The Patriot Act also incorporates sections on money laundering and the financing of terrorism. Few would argue with the money laundering provisions, but the act also includes the Financial Anti-Terrorism Act of October 17th, 2001, which permits the freezing of assets and investigation of individuals suspected of being financial or material supporters of terrorism. The definition of supporter is extremely elastic and could be construed as providing material assistance or even verbal or written support. The assets are frozen for as long as the government carries out the investigation and the government is under no obligation to proceed with any alacrity. Several cases involving Islamic charities in Northern Virginia have been dragging on since 9/11, with no resolution in sight. And "suspected" is the key word in terms of the standard of evidence, as there is no oversight or appeal to the process. The information used to make the case is secret and available only to the government.

Probably most disturbing to libertarians are the National Security Letters (NSL) authorized in Title 5 of the Act. The NSL has been described as an administrative subpoena that can be used by a number of government agencies that have investigative authority. This means in practice that they are mostly used by the FBI. The NSL is used to obtain documents and information relating to any individual or to organizations, to include employment, health, financial, and credit records. There is no requirement for probable cause and there is no judicial oversight of the process. The recipient of the NSL cannot reveal that he has received the letter to anyone and can be prosecuted if he violates that restriction. At FBI, the letters can be issued by any Special Agent in Charge of any field office, which means that the authority to approve a NSL is essentially local, is not reviewed at a higher level, and does not have to be linked to any actual terrorism case. Between 2003 and 2006, the FBI issued 200,000 National Security Letters. As of 2005, the NSLs had been used to obtain more than one million personal records, including medical histories and credit reports. A Justice Department investigation determined that most had nothing to do with terrorism.

There have been some legal challenges to the National Security Letters but the FBI, Defense Department, and CIA continue to issue them in large numbers. The first challenge was a district court ruling in September 2004 that the national security letter statute was itself unconstitutional because it violates the First and Fourth Amendments to the US Constitution, relating to freedom of speech and association and freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures. This prompted Congress to amend the law to allow a recipient to challenge the demand for records as well as the gag order. The second challenge was a December 2008 appeals court decision that ruled that the amended gag provisions violate the First Amendment. The FBI now must prove to a court that disclosure would harm national security when the recipient refused to comply with the gag order. The FBI claims that it has adopted both court rulings as policy, but it is not clear to what extent the gag rule remains in place. Because of adverse publicity, the ability of the FBI to use NSLs at public libraries was terminated.

It is undeniable that the Patriot Act infringes on constitutional rights to free speech, freedom of association, freedom from illegal search, the right to habeas corpus, prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment, and freedom from the illegal seizure of private property, but defenders of the Acts claim that the infringements are moderate, incremental, and necessary. Defenders of the Constitution would claim that any infringement is illegal and therefore unacceptable. There are also inconsistencies in terms of how the act operates. It is legal under the act to intercept and read an email communication or listen to a phone conversation but illegal to open a letter moving through the United States Postal Service. The part of the act criminalizing giving “expert advice and assistance” to a terrorist group is so broad that it would mean that someone advising the group to surrender to authorities could be arrested. A doctor offering advice on child rearing at an orphanage in Hamas governed Gaza might likewise be prosecuted upon returning to the United States.

With the Patriot Act, any objection to Washington’s foreign policy can be construed as an act of terrorism. We have empowered the police to read our private communications, place wiretaps into our homes and places of work, look into our finances and medical histories, and even search our houses without a warrant. We no longer have the right to associate freely and our property can be seized by the government while we are being investigated. The Patriot Act opens the door to fishing expeditions by the government that violate the rights of every American citizen. It is a law that is worthy only of a police state and everyone who cares about the constitution should unite to demand its repeal.

These people will not give up until they centralize their power through global climate regulations...

UN warns of climate change’s potentially dire impact on food security

The effects of slow-onset climate change are expected to have “potentially catastrophic” impact on food production in developing countries in future, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) warned today, calling for action to mitigate the adverse consequences.

Clinton To Congress: Obama Would Ignore Your War ResolutionsSusan Crabtree
Update: Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA), who asked Clinton about the War Powers Act during a classified briefing, said Clinton and the administration are sidestepping the measure's provisions giving Congress the ability to put a 60-day time limit on any military action.

"They are not committed to following the important part of the War Powers Act," he told TPM in a phone interview. "She said they are certainly willing to send reports [to us] and if they issue a press release, they'll send that to us too."

The White House would forge ahead with military action in Libya even if Congress passed a resolution constraining the mission, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said during a classified briefing to House members Wednesday afternoon.

Clinton was responding to a question from Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) about the administration's response to any effort by Congress to exercise its war powers, according to a senior Republican lawmaker who attended the briefing.

The answer surprised many in the room because Clinton plainly admitted the administration would ignore any and all attempts by Congress to shackle President Obama's power as commander in chief to make military and wartime decisions. In doing so, he would follow a long line of Presidents who have ignored the act since its passage, deeming it an unconstitutional encroachment on executive power.

Other than that, the lawmaker said he learned nothing new during the classified briefing by Clinton, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

A cross-section of Democrats and Republicans are opposed to President Obama's decision to authorize air strikes in Libya without seeking a resolution of approval or a declaration of war from Congress. Lawmakers ranging from Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) to Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN), the top Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, have groused about not being consulted before Obama took military action.

The War Powers Act of 1973, passed in the aftermath of the Vietnam War, puts limits on the ability of the President to send American troops into combat areas without congressional approval. Under the act, the President can only send combat troops into battle or into areas where ''imminent'' hostilities are likely, for 60 days without either a declaration of war by Congress or a specific congressional mandate.

The President can extend the time the troops are in the combat area for 30 extra days, without Congressional approval, for a total of 90 days. After that, is unchartered territory. The act does not specifically say what Congress could do if the President turns a blind eye to Congress and refuses to have his role as commander-in-chief constrained, as Presidents have routinely done.

The only options Congress would have at that point is to cut off funding for future military operations and override what would likely be a presidential veto of any such measure.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has asked his caucus to postpone any Libya resolutions until after they receive a classified briefing Wednesday evening. Afterward, Reid said, all bets are off and Democrats can offer any type of war powers resolution they want.

"I've told my caucus, 'Come loaded with all your questions; ask questions in this classified setting. And then if in fact you want to do more legislatively, you're entitled to do it,'" Reid told reporters Tuesday. "The War Powers Act we believe is valid, is very clear, setting forth timelines."

Reid said he read sections of the War Powers Act to his caucus at a lunchtime policy meeting Tuesday.

Now, a new research report from a surprising source may help to lay this skepticism to rest. A study from NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland looking at climate data over the past century has concluded that solar variation has made a significant impact on the Earth's climate. The report concludes that evidence for climate changes based on solar radiation can be traced back as far as the Industrial Revolution.

Past research has shown that the sun goes through eleven year cycles. At the cycle's peak, solar activity occurring near sunspots is particularly intense, basking the Earth in solar heat. According to Robert Cahalan, a climatologist at the Goddard Space Flight Center, "Right now, we are in between major ice ages, in a period that has been called the Holocene."

Thomas Woods, solar scientist at the University of Colorado in Boulder concludes, "The fluctuations in the solar cycle impacts Earth's global temperature by about 0.1 degree Celsius, slightly hotter during solar maximum and cooler during solar minimum. The sun is currently at its minimum, and the next solar maximum is expected in 2012."

According to the study, during periods of solar quiet, 1,361 watts per square meter of solar energy reaches Earth's outermost atmosphere. Periods of more intense activity brought 1.4 watts per square meter (0.1 percent) more energy.

While the NASA study acknowledged the sun's influence on warming and cooling patterns, it then went badly off the tracks. Ignoring its own evidence, it returned to an argument that man had replaced the sun as the cause current warming patterns. Like many studies, this conclusion was based less on hard data and more on questionable correlations and inaccurate modeling techniques.

Anti-terrorism officials conducted a helicopter survey of
New York City's radiation sources in preparation for a so-called "dirty
bomb" attack - and discovered a Staten Island park with dangerously high
levels of radium, a new report found.

Federal authorities found 80 unexpected "hot spots" around New York
City, according to the Government Accountability Office, the
investigative arm of Congress.

The GAO report released Thursday details a previously undisclosed aerial
anti-terrorism program in New York City, one which may be extended to
other cities worried about the possible release of radioactive material
by terrorists.

The report does not identify which city park had the contaminated soil,
but NYPD officials said it was in Gateway National Park in Staten
Island. The site was closed, and New York has requested federal money to
do a citywide aerial survey every year to update the information.

By creating a map of the city's radiation sources, city officials hope
to be able to respond more quickly in the event of a dirty bomb attack,
know exactly which streets are contaminated and get civilians away.

New York is the first and only U.S. city to conduct a complete aerial
radiological survey, having paid the U.S. Department of Energy $800,000
for the 2005 study.

The helicopters picked up sources of low-level radiation from expected
places, like granite statues and medical isotopes at hospitals, but it
also found dozens of other sources of unexpected radioactivity, the GAO
report found.

"NYPD officials indicated that the survey was tremendously valuable
because it identified more than 80 locations with radiological sources
that required further investigation to determine their risk," the report
said.

At the Staten Island park, sensors detected large quantities of radium
in the soil. Long-term exposure to radium increases the risk of
developing lymphoma, bone cancer and leukemia.

National Park Service spokesman Brian Feeney said the area is a one-acre
piece of the 570-acre Great Kills Park, which is part of the larger
Gateway park.

Feeney said experts assured them after the August 2005 study that the
area posed no public health risk, and said visitors do not go into that
area anyway because of dense vegetation. He did not know if any warnings
had been placed around the site.

The radiation apparently comes from "some piece of industrial equipment,
pieces of old rusty metal. Whatever this equipment used to do, it picked
up radioactivity," he said.

"We keep people out of that area. It's a non-accessible area of the
park, no one can get in there," said Feeney. "There's no health hazard
now, there was never a health hazard to the public."

He said the agency has applied to the Department of Energy for funding
to further survey the site.

Staten Island's congressman, Rep. Vito Fossella, said the contamination
was a surprise to him and residents near the park, and he demanded more
information.

"It is essential for the government to act immediately to fully
understand the extent of the contamination," said Fossella, who was
trying to arrange a meeting Friday with federal and city officials to
discuss further testing and possible removal of the contaminated soil.

One alleged radiation hot spot on Manhattan's east side has the
potential for becoming a political hot spot: A strong radiation spike
from the area of the Israeli Embassy. Officials would not comment on why
they thought that particular area allegedly showed such a stunning peak
in radiation.

The aerial survey is designed to help local officials react more quickly
in the event of terrorists detonating a "dirty bomb" that releases
radioactive material into the air. With the survey, police may be able
to pinpoint the exact source of radiation by comparing new readings to
their pre-existing "radiation map" of the area.

NYPD spokesman Paul Browne said the department wanted a record of the
city's naturally occurring and other "radiological signatures" to
compare with periodic readings it does to detect for dirty bombs or
other nuclear devices.

"It gives us a baseline so we can pick up any anomalies," he said.

New York City is the only major city to conduct a full-scale Aerial
Background Radiation Survey to identify "hot spots," though such work
has been done in the nation's capitol, according to the report.

The GAO found neither the Department of Energy nor the Department of
Homeland Security believe they are required to conduct such radiation
mapping, though the investigators said there were "significant benefits"
to surveys in other urban areas.

Homeland Security officials agreed that they should study the cost and
effectiveness of expanded radiation mapping in additional cities.

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., called the report further proof the
federal government is not doing enough to help cities guard against
terrorism.

The hot spot mapping initiative "should also be shared with cities
across the country, not mothballed because the Homeland Security
Department doesn't want to put up the money," Schumer said.

The GAO report also found the Department of Energy may need to beef up
security at Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada and Andrews Air Force Base
in Maryland because those sites hold key national assets for responding
to a radiological or nuclear attack.

Specialized quick-response teams and equipment are concentrated at those
two sites, and a successful attack against either could leave one
section of the country with limited capacity to respond to a subsequent
strike with radioactive weapons, the GAO said.

The agency's associate administrator, Michael C. Kane, was adamant the
sites are safe.

"We categorically reject the contention that physical security at two of
our facilities may not be sufficient for protecting against terrorist
attacks," Kane wrote.

Michigan Republicans came in a little late to Wisconsin’s union-arson party, but they’re uncovering innovative new ways to wage war on their state’s working population. Today’s weapon: a plan to revoke the teaching license of the state’s educators if their unions go on strike at any time. Under existing law, teachers aren’t even legally allowed to go on strike, but it’s rarely enforced. Not because there’s anything wrong with a state putting its citizens on trial because they protested something; because it’s costly to hold hearings for each individual teacher. But under the new legislation, Michigan could ban its entire workforce of teachers from the profession if they all decide to strike over Governor Rick Snyder’s proposed cuts. Yeah, that will teach those evil teachers a lesson about trying to hurt the education of our children! Now nobody will be able to teach the kids of Michigan! Oh, wait.
So will the teachers strike?

The Michigan Education Association, representing 155,000 teachers and staff, asked locals this month to vote by April 15 to authorize work actions to protest proposed education cuts and employee concessions. Actions, according to a letter to members, could range from a march in Lansing to a work stoppage.

Doug Pratt, a union spokesman, said the results of the votes being conducted by MEA locals will not be released. On Tuesday, he did say that some locals have already conducted their votes on whether to authorize job actions.

155,000? That’s a whole lot of drifters to hire! Maybe Michigan can widen the net a little bit on the replacement teachers. Sex offenders seem to like kids; Michigan should certify them to be teachers too. And animals! Kids like animals! They’d probably love being taught algebra and getting disciplined by a deer!

In the interest of full disclosure (haha, when has this blog ever done that?), your editor’s parents are both union public school teachers in Michigan. So we can tell you first hand, those people are the most ruthless, greedy, child-hating thugs on the planet. To supplement their princely income, they even engage in criminal activity like buying-books-and-supplies-for-their-classroom schemes and coaching high-school softball. AWFUL THUGS.

Carlos Rosa Heading To Japan
The D'Backs announced that they released Carlos Rosa to sell him to a Japanese team. Rosa, 26, is out of options, so he would have had to clear waivers before going to the minor leagues.

Delaying the tax hit on retirement-plan contributions, a much vaunted benefit of 401(k)s, isn't as valuable if you face higher income-tax rates when you retire.

Yet higher tax rates are all too likely in the years ahead.

For years, the standard thinking has been that people drop to a lower tax bracket in retirement. Thus, with a 401(k), you get years of investment returns building on money that otherwise would have gone to taxes, and when your tax bill on 401(k) withdrawals comes due, you pay at a lower rate.

"For the longest time, it seemed like almost a no-brainer that people, when they were in their income-earning stage, would be in a higher tax bracket," said Marcia Wagner, principal of Boston-based Wagner Law Group, a law firm specializing in employee benefits. "That may or may not be true in the future."

While it's difficult, if not impossible, to predict how lawmakers will handle future tax rates, some say a future increase in federal income-tax rates appears inevitable.

"If you look at the federal deficit, I don't see any way the tax rate is going anywhere but up," said Jack VanDerhei, research director with the Employee Benefit Research Institute, a nonprofit research organization.

Smaller accounts less likely to be affected

What does that mean for 401(k) savers? If your nest egg is small, and Social Security will provide the bulk of your retirement income, you're likely to be in a lower tax rate when you retire. It may well be low enough that any changes to federal income-tax rates won't make a big difference to you.

But those with a heftier retirement account — large enough to pay an income not far below what they earned while working — may find themselves in the same tax bracket in retirement. And they may take a hit if lawmakers raise income-tax rates in the interim.

Also a factor: the amount of time you have until retirement. The longer you have, and the smaller the tax increase when you get there, the likelier it is that contributing to a 401(k) will work out to your benefit, VanDerhei said.

That's because your investments have time to grow. "The longer you're in the plan, the smaller the differential between the two [income-tax] rates, and the higher the rate of return, the more likely it is to stay in the favor of the employee to make the contributions," VanDerhei said.

But "if you're too close to retirement and the gap between the tax rates pre- and post-retirement is too large, it [may not] work out to the benefit of the employee," he said.

Another wrinkle: In retirement, distributions from tax-deferred accounts such as a 401(k) become part of your adjusted gross income, said Laurence Kotlikoff, professor of economics at Boston University and founder of ESPlanner.com, an online retirement-planning tool.

"If you take enough money out in a given year," he said, "it can lead to higher taxes on Social Security benefits."

Another German “Will Soon Unveil A Master Plan For A Transformation Of Society”

By P Gosselin

We’ve seen that kind of thinking before. Authoritarianism.

Forget democracy, human freedom and free markets. These concepts, which have made today’s human prosperity and long lifespans a reality for humans, wherever and whenever they are given the chance to work, are upsetting a small but very elitist group of individuals who view these concepts as a disruption and a threat to their world view.

The English edition of Der Spiegel has a recent interview with Prof Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, Director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research. In this interview Schellnhuber announced that he would unveil his “Master Plan” for transforming society – one no doubt that suits his world view. In Schellhuber’s view, human society needs to be scaled back and managed by an elite group of “wise men” who know what is best for the rest.

Schellnhuber’s contempt for today’s organisation of western soctety is illustrated by his statements. For example Der Spiegel stumps Schellnhuber with a simple question: “Why is it that your messages haven’t been all that well received until now?” Schellnhuber responds:

I’m neither a psychologist nor a sociologist. But my life experiences have shown that the love of convenience and ignorance are man’s biggest character flaws. It’s a potentially deadly mixture.”
Oh the contempt. So we are all too comfortable and ignorant. It’s time for “wiser men” to think for the rest of us. Your message, Mr Schellnhuber, has not been well received because it is anti-democratic and authoritarian. Your kind of thinking is a threat to the principles of Germany’s Constitution and so belongs under government observation.

Schellnhuber indeed has a very poor understanding of history. History teaches us a different lesson - that it is not the combination of love for convenience and ignorance that is man’s greatest flaw, rather it is the combination of towering arrogance and ignorance that is man’s greatest flaw, and so that is the real threat to society. Schellnhuber also denies climate history and concocts his own fraudulent version to warrant an authoritative intervention.

The belief that the planet needs to be dictated by a higher authority is what makes people like Schellnhuber so dangerous. Their impatience and frustration with democracy, and their claim to have superior knowledge, remind us of others who have led us us down very dark paths back in the 20th century.

These people are convinced they are all-knowing. Der Spiegel asks: “Do you feel that the government’s abrupt change of course in relation to its energy policy is adequate?” Schellnhuber replies:

No. It can only be the beginning of a deep-seated shift. The German Advisory Council on Global Change, which I chair, will soon unveil a master plan for a transformation of society. Precisely because of Fukushima, we believe that a new basis of our coexistence is needed.”
A master plan for transforming society drafted by a climate scientist, a person who admits having no background in sociology. This plan no doubt will be asserted by authority, and not democracy. Schellnhuber has indicated many times that democracy is flawed and is a nuisance. It’s getting in the way of solving the ”world’s crises” (like zero temperature growth over the last 15 years).

Never before has it been so important to have independent, honest voices and sources of information. We are – as a society – inundated and overwhelmed with a flood of information from a wide array of sources, but these sources of information, by and large, serve the powerful interests and individuals that own them. The main sources of information, for both public and official consumption, include the mainstream media, alternative media, academia and think tanks.

The mainstream media is the most obvious in its inherent bias and manipulation. The mainstream media is owned directly by large multinational corporations, and through their boards of directors are connected with a plethora of other major global corporations and elite interests. An example of these connections can be seen through the board of Time Warner.

Time Warner owns Time Magazine, HBO, Warner Bros., and CNN, among many others. The board of directors includes individuals past or presently affiliated with: the Council on Foreign Relations, the IMF, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Warburg Pincus, Phillip Morris, and AMR Corporation, among many others.

Two of the most “esteemed” sources of news in the U.S. are the New York Times (referred to as “the paper of record”) and the Washington Post. The New York Times has on its board people who are past or presently affiliated with: Schering-Plough International (pharmaceuticals), the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, Chevron Corporation, Wesco Financial Corporation, Kohlberg & Company, The Charles Schwab Corporation, eBay Inc., Xerox, IBM, Ford Motor Company, Eli Lilly & Company, among others. Hardly a bastion of impartiality.

And the same could be said for the Washington Post, which has on its board: Lee Bollinger, the President of Columbia University and Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York; Warren Buffett, billionaire financial investor, Chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway; and individuals associated with (past or presently): the Coca-Cola Company, New York University, Conservation International, the Council on Foreign Relations, Xerox, Catalyst, Johnson & Johnson, Target Corporation, RAND Corporation, General Motors, and the Business Council, among others.

It is also important to address how the mainstream media is intertwined, often covertly and secretly, with the government. Carl Bernstein, one of the two Washington Post reporters who covered the Watergate scandal, revealed that there were over 400 American journalists who had “secretly carried out assignments for the Central Intelligence Agency.” Interestingly, “the use of journalists has been among the most productive means of intelligence-gathering employed by the CIA.” Among organizations which cooperated with the CIA were the "American Broadcasting Company, the National Broadcasting Company, the Associated Press, United Press International, Reuters, Hearst Newspapers, Scripps-Howard, Newsweek magazine, the Mutual Broadcasting System, the Miami Herald and the old Saturday Evening Post and New York Herald-Tribune."

By far the most valuable of these associations, according to CIA officials, have been with the New York Times, CBS and Time Inc. The CIA even ran a training program “to teach its agents to be journalists,” who were “then placed in major news organizations with help from management.”

These types of relationships have continued in the decades since, although perhaps more covertly and quietly than before. For example, it was revealed in 2000 that during the NATO bombing of Kosovo, “several officers from the US Army's 4th Psychological Operations (PSYOPS) Group at Ft. Bragg worked in the news division at CNN's Atlanta headquarters.” This same Army Psyop outfit had “planted stories in the U.S. media supporting the Reagan Administration's Central America policies,” which was described by the Miami Herald as a “vast psychological warfare operation of the kind the military conducts to influence a population in enemy territory.” These Army PSYOP officers also worked at National Public Radio (NPR) at the same time. The US military has, in fact, had a strong relationship with CNN.

In 2008, it was reported that the Pentagon ran a major propaganda campaign by using retired Generals and former Pentagon officials to present a good picture of the administration’s war-time policies. The program started in the lead-up to the Iraq War in 2003 and continued into 2009. These officials, presented as “military analysts”, regurgitate government talking points and often sit on the boards of military contractors, thus having a vested interest in the subjects they are brought on to “analyze.”

The major philanthropic foundations in the United States have often used their enormous wealth to co-opt voices of dissent and movements of resistance into channels that are safe for the powers that be. As McGeorge Bundy, former President of the Ford Foundation once said, “Everything the Foundation does is to make the world safe for Capitalism.”

Examples of this include philanthropies like the Rockefeller Foundation, Ford Foundation and the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation providing immense financial and organizational support to Non-Governmental Organizations. Furthermore, the alternative media are often funded by these same foundations, which has the effect of influencing the direction of coverage as well as the stifling of critical analysis.

The American banking system is always on the edge of crisis because of the Federal Reserve System.

For all practical purposes, the United States has one bank, the Federal Reserve with a bunch of branches that are treated with different degrees of respect. Some are treated rudely, while others in the eyes of the Fed, can do no wrong.

One support method the Fed uses to protect its favored "branches" is the discount rate. At its blog site today, the New York Fed attempts to justify this Fed tool that serves to prop up the entire convoluted Federal Reserve System.

We can see a key problem with the, Fed as overlord, current banking system by taking a look at the first paragraph of a psot by NY Fed bloggers applauding themselves. The bloggers write:

...the basic rationale for [the discount window] is that circumstances can arise, such as bank runs and panics, when even fundamentally sound banks cannot raise liquidity on short notice
But how can a "fundamentally sound" bank ever face a liquidity problem? A liquidity problem comes about only because the Federal Reserve system encourages (partly through the discount window) the mismatch between time structure of money deposited at the bank and money loaned out. A liquidity problem simply means that a bank may have loaned out money for 30 years, when a depositor has the right to withdraw such funds after 30 days. Banks aren't too concerned about this mismatch, since they know they can always go to the Fed to get money (via the discount window) if withdrawals are occurring that are greater than cash the bank has on hand or can borrow from other sources.

In other words, it is the Fed's backstop that encourages the mismatch between length of deposits and length of loans. Without this backstop, banks would never create such a mismatch. It would be too risky for them (And this is aside from the moral implications of promising to pay in 30ndays some funds on money that has been loaned out for years.)

Without a Fed, banks taking in short-term money would loan it out for short-terms and would make long-term loans with money that depositors had agreed to keep on deposit for the long term. End of liquidity problems for banks and the start of truly fundamentally sound banks.

The NY Fed bloggers go on to discuss the various ways the discount rate should be implemented by what the Fed bloggers think are somehow "fundamentally sound" banks, when the deposit versus loan time structure of these banks is more distorted than a Dali painting.

The final sentence of the final paragraph on the NY Fed post is probably most telling:

Admittedly, the existence of the discount window may create some moral hazard, but of course, the Federal Reserve limits moral hazard by restricting discount window access to depository institutions that are closely regulated and supervised by federal banking authorities.
Bottom line: The Fed holds all the cards over its "branches", get out of line and they will suddenly see you as an insolvent bank versus a bank with just a liquidity problem. The bloggers admit that some economists don't think the Fed can even technically tell the difference, if they wanted to:

Some observers contend that central bankers are no better equipped to distinguish illiquid but solvent banks than are private investors.
It's a rigged game, boom, busts, bank failures versus just a liquidity crisis, Ben Bernanke just strokes his beard and decides what's what. (After consulting with his controls, of course.)

A List Of 28 Things That Will Make You Think That There Is Something Seriously Wrong With This Country

The following is a list of 28 things that will make you really think that there is something seriously wrong with this country....

#1 According to the Economic Policy Institute, almost 25 percent of U.S. households now have zero net worth or negative net worth. Back in 2007, that number was just 18.6 percent.

#2 According to the Pentagon, the cost of the first week of attacks on Libya was 600 million dollars.

#3 The major food producers are shrinking the sizes of their packages so that they won't have to raise prices. The New York Times recently did a story about one woman who was absolutely shocked when she started keeping track of shrinking package sizes at her local supermarket....

Ms. Stauber, 33, said she began inspecting her other purchases, aisle by aisle. Many canned vegetables dropped to 13 or 14 ounces from 16; boxes of baby wipes went to 72 from 80; and sugar was stacked in 4-pound, not 5-pound, bags, she said.
#4 It is being projected that for the first time ever, the OPEC nations are going to bring in over a trillion dollars from exporting oil this year. Their biggest customer is the United States.

#5 According to a recent census report, 13% of all the homes in the United States are sitting empty.

#6 20 percent of all the electricity in the United States is produced by nuclear power plants. Many of those plants are very similar to the damaged reactors at the Fukushima nuclear complex in Japan.

#7 Barack Obama promised us that radiation from the nuclear disaster in Japan would not be a problem in the United States, but already it has shown up in milk in Spokane, Washington.

"If we continue down on the path on which the fiscal authorities put us, we will become insolvent, the question is when."
Of course the Federal Reserve system was designed to get the U.S. government trapped in perpetual debt so actually he should be blaming himself and his friends over at the Fed.

#9 China produced 19.8 percent of all the goods consumed in the world last year. The United States only produced 19.4 percent.

#10 Back in 2005 at the peak of the housing bubble, the median property tax on a home in the United States was $1614. Today, even though home values have sunk like a rock, that figure has risen to $1917.

#11 In New Jersey, home owners pay an average of $7576 in property taxes every single year.

#12 According to the Federal Reserve, the adjusted monetary base has nearly tripled since mid-2008.

#13 Thanks for all the money printing Bernanke - according to one unofficial estimate, the U.S. in on track to have an 8.3 percent rate of inflation for the year.

#14 According to a recent article posted on the website of the American Institute of Economic Research, the purchasing power of a U.S. dollar declined from $1.00 in 1913 to 4.6 cents in 2009.

#15 The Ogallala Aquifer stretches from South Dakota to Texas, it is the largest underground supply of fresh water in the world, and it is rapidly running dry. So how is "America's breadbasket" going to continue to produce massive amounts of food for the rest of the world once that happens?

#16 The number of homes that were actually repossessed reached the 1 million mark for the first time ever during 2010.

#17 The U.S. industrial base has disintegrated so badly that we could literally export our entire manufacturing output and still not balance our trade with the rest of the globe.

#18 Goldman Sachs almost always wins. According to a recent regulatory filing, Goldman Sachs lost money on just 25 days in 2010 and on only 19 days in 2009.

#19 In 1994, the top 1 percent of all income earners paid 25 percent of all state taxes in New York. Today, the top 1 percent of all income earners pay 41 percent of all state taxes in New York.

#20 The National Institutes of Health has spent approximately $442,340 to study the behavior of male prostitutes in Vietnam.

#21 According to an absolutely stunning recent poll, 40 percent of all U.S. doctors plan to leave the profession at some point during the next three years because of Obamacare.

#22 If the new health care law is so great, then why is the Obama administration allowing so many organizations to opt out of it? According to the Department of Health and Human Services, more than 1,000 organizations have received Obamacare waivers so far.

#23 Large American cattle farms actually feed chicken manure to cattle because it is so cheap and because we produce way too much of it to properly dispose of as fertilizer.

#24 Every single year, Americans spend approximately 7.6 billion hours preparing their taxes.

#25 The IMF says that in order to fix the U.S. government budget deficit, taxes need to be doubled on every single U.S. citizen.

#26 Mandatory federal spending is going to surpass total federal revenue for the first time ever in this fiscal year. That was not supposed to happen until 50 years from now.

#27 Today, the U.S. national debt is over 14 times larger than it was back in 1981.

#28 According to the National Inflation Association, when you factor in the unfunded liabilities of the U.S. government, total federal debt obligations now come to a grand total of 76 trillion dollars.

Wednesday, March 30, 2011

Obamanomics at work: Massachusetts job fair canceled due to lack of jobs

A Taunton, Massachusetts job fair that’s been held annually since 1984 has been canceled for the very best of reasons: There ain’t no jobs.

Boston.com has the story of the unemployed and their unemployers:

A Massachusetts employment organization has canceled its annual job fair because not enough companies have come forward to offer jobs.

Richard Shafer, chairman of the Taunton Employment Task Force, says 20 to 25 employers are needed for the fair scheduled for April 6, but just 10 tables had been reserved. One table was reserved by a nonprofit that offers human services to job seekers, and three by temporary employment agencies.

Shafer tells the Taunton Daily Gazette the lack of employers means the task force won’t have enough money to properly advertise the fair.

Just move along. There is nothing to see or worry about. The government has everything under control...

EPA: Expect More Radiation in RainwaterJeff McMahon

The Environmental Protection Agency yesterday reported finding elevated levels of iodine-131, a product of nuclear fission, in rainwater in Pennsylvania and Massachusetts. The levels exceed the maximum contaminant level (MCL) permitted in drinking water, but EPA continues to assure the public there is no need for alarm:

“It is important to note that the corresponding MCL for iodine-131 was calculated based on long-term chronic exposures over the course of a lifetime – 70 years. The levels seen in rainwater are expected to be relatively short in duration,” the agency states in a FAQ that accompanied yesterday’s brief news release.

“In both cases these are levels above the normal background levels historically reported in these areas.”

EPA said it is receiving “verbal reports” of higher levels of radiation in rainwater samples from other states as well, and that Americans should continue to expect short-term contamination of rainwater as radioactive isotopes spread through the atmosphere from Japan.

“We continue to expect similar reports from state agencies and others across the nation given the nature and duration of the Japanese nuclear incident.”

EPA is analyzing rainwater samples taken from 18 monitoring stations around the nation, promising to release results soon. It is stepping up sampling of rainwater, drinking water, and milk.

The Food and Drug Administration released a statement on milk Saturday:

At this time, theoretical models do not indicate that harmful amounts of radiation will reach the U.S. and, therefore, there is little possibility of domestic milk being contaminated as a result of grass or feed contamination in the U.S. FDA, together with other agencies, is carefully monitoring any possibility for distribution of radiation.”

EPA also maintains 140 air monitoring stations. Those have detected radiation from the Fukushima nuclear disaster in five Western states: California, Colorado, Hawaii, Washington, and, as of yesterday, Nevada.

The isotopes detected in Western states have been found in minuscule amounts, officials say, much too small to threaten health. Scientists trace the isotopes to Japan because they are products of nuclear fission—iodine-131, xenon-133, and cesium-137.

“Unless you have an accident like this, you wouldn’t expect to see this. No doubt it’s from Japan,” Ted Hartwell, manager of the Desert Research Institute’s Community Environmental Monitoring Program, told the Associated Press.

25 letters that claim nuclear bombs are hidden throughout the United States have been sent to multiple investigators and citizens in the Chicago area.

The letter inside said, “The Al-Qaeda organization has planted 160 nuclear bombs throughout the U.S. in schools, stadiums, churches, stores, financial institutions and government buildings.” It also said, “This is a suicide mission for us,” reported CBS Chicago.

While this news may be startling to many, it is no surprise to those in the alternative media. The idea of nukes in the United States has run rampant for years, with many believing rogue elements of our government will actually use these nukes within the United States to create enough chaos to initiate a world government.

In 2002 the right wing news organization World Net Daily reported that Bin Laden had snuck over 20 suitcase nukes into the United States,

A new book by an FBI consultant on international terrorism says Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaida terrorist network purchased 20 suitcase nuclear weapons from former KGB agents in 1998 for $30 million.

The book,“Al Qaeda: Brotherhood of Terror,” by Paul L. Williams, also says this deal was one of at least three in the last decade in which al-Qaida purchased small nuclear weapons or weapons-grade nuclear uranium.

This report was one of the first out of a long line of fear mongering reports that have been used to plant the idea of Al Qaeda nuking us into the mind of everyday American citizens.

Most remember the “missing nukes” report that broke in 2007. Apparently several nukes were lost for upwards of 36 hours after leaving U.S.A.F Base Minot in North Dakota.

According to a wide range of reports, several nuclear bombs were “lost” for 36 hours after taking off August 29/30, 2007 on a “cross-country journey” across the U.S., from U.S.A.F Base Minot in North Dakota to U.S.A.F. Base Barksdale in Louisiana. Reportedly, in total there were six W80-1 nuclear warheads armed on AGM-129 Advanced Cruise Missiles (ACMs) that were “lost.” The story was first reported by the Military Times, after military servicemen leaked the story, reported Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya.

The idea that Al Qaeda could place over a hundred nuclear weapons into government buildings throughout the United States is 100% impossible. Cave dwelling ninjas do not have the ability to either steal or create nuclear weapons, fly them over to America, and somehow plant them in government buildings.

The fact that the Pentagon and the CIA run Al Qaeda, have dined with top “terrorist” Anwar al-Awlaki, and openly fund Al Qaeda seems to be unimportant to the corporate controlled media.

This isn’t a realistic option yet reports like this are used to trick ignorant Americans into hating Muslims even more.

This also gives elements of our government the ability to say, “told you so” if or when a nuke detonates in an American city.

Harvard economics professor Gregory Mankiw wrote an article that was published in the NY Times yesterday entitled, "It’s 2026, and the Debt Is Due". In this article, Mankiw gave a hypothetical Presidential address the President of the U.S. might make in the year 2026 after a failed bond auction. Mankiw's hypothetical Presidential address takes place in a scenario where in the year 2026, the U.S. Treasury "tried to auction its most recent issue of government bonds" but "almost no one was buying." According to Mankiw's hypothetical speech, during this 2026 crisis the President will admit, "The private market will lend us no more."

Unfortunately, Professor Mankiw fails to understand that the U.S. has zero chance of surviving until the year 2026. What Mankiw predicts will happen 15 years from now is already happening today right under his nose, but somehow he fails to realize it.

The public today has already stopped buying U.S. treasuries. The Pimco Total Return Fund, which was the largest private holder of U.S. government bonds, has just reduced their holdings down to zero. The private sector was buying 30% of U.S. treasuries, but today is no longer buying at all. The Federal Reserve is currently buying 70% of U.S. treasuries. If it wasn't for the Federal Reserve buying U.S. treasuries, we would already be experiencing failed bond auctions today.

According to Mankiw, the President will say in 2026, "Today, most of the large baby-boom generation is retired. They are no longer working and paying taxes, but they are eligible for the many government benefits we offer the elderly." The fact is, the last baby-boomer turned 46 years old in 2010 and 46 is the age in which the average American reaches peak consumer spending. Therefore, even though most baby-boomers might not be retired, baby-boomer spending is now in free-fall while baby-boomers are simultaneously signing up for entitlement programs at record pace. This will begin to affect our economy today, not 15 years from now.

Mankiw's hypothetical speech has the President admitting in 2026 that we "have to cut Social Security immediately, especially for higher-income beneficiaries. Social Security will still keep the elderly out of poverty, but just barely" and we "have to limit Medicare and Medicaid. These programs will still provide basic health care, but they will no longer cover many expensive treatments. Individuals will have to pay for these treatments on their own or, sadly, do without." The truth is, if the U.S. government cut 100% of all spending except for Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, we would still have a budget deficit from these entitlement programs and interest payments on our debt alone. If the U.S. wants to prevent hyperinflation and survive until 2026, we need to make major cuts to these programs today. By 2026, it will be over a decade too late and these programs will no longer exist at all.

Mankiw's hypothetical 2026 Presidential address goes on to say that "over the last several years" the U.S. has experienced a "vicious circle of rising budget deficits" and "as the ratio of our debt to gross domestic product reached ever-higher levels, investors started getting nervous". Does Mankiw realize that the U.S. just reported a budget deficit for the month of February 2011 of $222.5 billion, more than the entire fiscal year of 2007? In our opinion, our budget deficits can't rise much more viciously than what they already are today, without the U.S. experiencing an outbreak of hyperinflation. We need to begin sharply reducing our deficits immediately or else hyperinflation this decade is inevitable.

Our real debt to GDP ratio in the U.S. today is already north of 500% when you include unfunded liabilities for entitlement programs, as well as other commitments like the backing of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It will simply be impossible for this figure to rise much higher without the U.S. experiencing hyperinflation. NIA believes that unless the U.S. government completely eliminated Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, there is no way the U.S. government will be able to stay afloat for another 15 years with such an unprecedented level of debt.

In 2026, Mankiw believes the President will admit that, "Our efforts to control health care costs have failed." He suggests the President will proclaim that, "We must now acknowledge that rising costs are driven largely by technological advances in saving lives. These advances are welcome, but they are expensive nonetheless." Does Professor Mankiw own a laptop computer, plasma TV, or mobile phone? These technologies are improving by leaps and bounds yet prices are falling. Technological advances are not driving health care costs higher! It is the government's involvement in the health care sector and their failure to allow the free market to operate that is driving health care costs through the roof.

Professor Mankiw believes the President will continue by saying, "We have to cut health insurance subsidies to middle-income families." NIA believes it is the very same subsidies Mankiw is referring to that are driving health care costs sky high. It is just like in the college education industry. If the government didn't provide subsidies for students to learn voodoo Keynesian economic theories from professors like Mankiw, college tuitions would be a lot more affordable.

To solve this supposed 2026 crisis, Mankiw believes the President will announce, "We will raise taxes on all but the poorest Americans. We will do this primarily by broadening the tax base, eliminating deductions for mortgage interest and state and local taxes. Employer-provided health insurance will hereafter be taxable compensation." Although NIA believes employer-provided health insurance should be taxable compensation because it would end the employer based health insurance system and make health insurance cheaper for all Americans, we believe it will be impossible for the government to raise any additional revenues from tax increases. We are at a point where any additional taxes will drive economic activity overseas and result in less tax receipts. When hyperinflation soon arrives, taxes will become irrelevant. The government will fund over 99% of its spending by printing money and less than 1% from taxation.

Mankiw also believes the President in 2026 will, "increase the gasoline tax by $2 a gallon. This will not only increase revenue, but will also address various social ills, from global climate change to local traffic congestion." Come 2026, gasoline will probably cost $20,000 per gallon, if we are lucky. An additional $2 gasoline tax will be absolutely pointless and meaningless.

Mankiw suggests that the President in 2026 will, "secure from the I.M.F. a temporary line of credit to help us through this crisis." The I.M.F. recently sold a large percentage of its gold reserves and by 2026 will likely be broke. Even if the I.M.F. was still around 15 years from now and did provide the U.S. with a line of credit that helps it survive the crisis, the largest line of credit the I.M.F. could possibly financially provide would only support a U.S. government that is less than 1/10 of its size today. Therefore, NIA believes the U.S. government should begin dramatically reducing its size immediately, before it is in need of a line of credit from the I.M.F.

It would be nice to think that the U.S. will be able to borrow and print money for another 15 years to fund endless budget deficits and that 2026 is some magical year when all of our debts will come due. The economy does not work this way and it is disgraceful that our nation's most prestigious ivy league schools are teaching such dangerous economic principles. Considering that a large percentage of our highest ranking government officials graduated from Harvard, it really explains a lot when you look at who is teaching economics at Harvard. Mankiw is the same professor who in April of 2009 called for the Federal Reserve to implement negative interest rates. Mankiw called for savers to be punished and for all Americans with $100,000 in the bank to have only $98,000 one year later.

It is the destructive Keynesian theories of economists like Mankiw that have gotten the U.S. economy into the dire situation it is in today. Mankiw and other professors like him are brainwashing American students into believing that forcing people to spend is the key to a healthy economy and the way to solve all economic problems is to create a lot of inflation. All across America, students are graduating colleges with hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt, no jobs, and no idea of how the economy actually works. They will spend the rest of their lives paying off their debts and trying to get the false economic information they were taught out of their heads. The college education system in America is the single largest fraud that exists today, and NIA is going to expose the truth about the government's conspiracy to turn American students into debt slaves in our next feature documentary, coming in April.

The threats came in the mail and to date, there have been 25 letters that warn of nuclear bombs destroying America.

People who got them called the FBI and CBS 2′s Kristyn Hartman learned, the Bureau’s Chicago office is leading the investigation.

FBI Special Agent Andre Zavala said, “Yes, they alarmed a lot of people.”

Attorney Tracy Rizzo was alarmed. A number of days ago, an envelope, with a Chicago postmark and a hand-written address to her private investigations firm, came in the mail.

The letter inside said, “The Al-Qaeda organization has planted 160 nuclear bombs throughout the U.S. in schools, stadiums, churches, stores, financial institutions and government buildings.” It also said, “This is a suicide mission for us.”

The writer, who claims to be Osama Bin Laden, tells the reader the nukes are remotely controlled. “It was clear the writer wanted to scare me,” said Rizzo, “Yes, it frightened me.” Rizzo was one of eight people in the Chicago area to contact the FBI.

Agencies in Oregon, California, Texas and Florida also got the letter with the Chicago postmark.

“There are items in the letter that lead us to believe it is a hoax,” said Zavala. “There are several demands documented that aren’t fully coherent.”

He said much of what’s in the message doesn’t add up, but in a post 9-11 world, the FBI can’t let it go – even if it does appear to be a hoax.

“The FBI investigates every element. We can’t take that chance,” said Zavala.

So, why the threats?

The writer alluded to how families in Afghanistan have to live. The FBI said it will find that writer, and when it does, he could face 5 to 10 years in prison for each letter mailed. Anyone who’s received a similar letter should call the FBI.

Based on a proposal by Home Secretary Theresa May, the police may be given new powers to prevent so-called hooligans from attending rallies and marches while officers will also be authorized to force demonstrators, who do not want to be known, to remove their face-scarves and balaclavas.

The announcement has raised concerns among MPs who say no hasty decision should be made on the issue as the police may abuse the “stop and search” powers to target ordinary people rather than “known hooligans”.

May outlined her plans during an emergency Commons briefing on the violent incidents, which marred the Saturday rally organized by the Trades Union Congress.

May told the MPs that she is considering “banning orders” similar to those used against football hooligans for the demonstrators who police thinks may turn to violence.

She also said officers should force more protestors to remove their masks and balaclavas to help the police quickly identify participants in the rallies.

"Just as the police review their operational tactics, so the Home Office will review the powers available to the police. I have asked the police whether they need further powers to prevent violence before it occurs. I am willing to consider powers which would ban known hooligans from rallies and marches and I will look into the powers the police already have to force the removal of face-coverings and balaclavas,” May said.

While the Metropolitan Police earlier said it has charged 149 people out of more than 200 arrested during the Saturday rallies with various offenses, at least five people have lodged complaints with Scotland Yard about police violence against marchers.

The Met said on Monday that it has charged 138 people in connection with the sit-in at Fortnum & Mason luxury store for charges including aggravated trespass.

However, the UK Uncut, which organized the sit-in dismissed any claims that those participating in the Fortnum & Mason incident resorted to violence.

"This was not a protest by people wearing balaclavas and breaking things. It was a peaceful and mild-mannered gathering by people from all walks of life - teachers, hospital workers, charity workers,” said Tim Matthews, a spokesman for UK Uncut.

"People who took part now find themselves charged with a criminal offence simply for exercising their right to protest," he added.

This come as Tom Brake MP, co-chair of the Liberal Democrat parliamentary policy committee on home affairs, justice and equalities warned the government against “a knee-jerk reaction” to what happened.

"Clearly there was a small minority who were out to cause trouble. We need to look in detail into whether the police have sufficient powers to tackle that, or whether they can be deployed differently to ensure such violent scenes don't happen again," Brake said.

Fluoride spill at water facility literally burns holes in parking lot cement
A recent chemical spill at a water treatment facility in Rock Island, Ill., required the assistance of an emergency relief crew decked in the very same type of hazmat suits being worn by workers at the Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear plant in Japan. Except instead of radiation, the leaked chemical at the water plant was actually hydrofluorosilicic acid, a chemical fluoride component commonly added to drinking supplies for the stated purpose of preventing cavities. This fluoride chemical is so hazardous that it actually began to burn through parking lot cement in Rock Island before emergency crews arrived on the scene.

According to reports from WQAD News 8 in Moline, a tanker truck delivering the fluoride began to overflow, leaking the chemical directly onto the parking lot where it spilled down towards the street. And before emergency crews arrived on the scene in full hazmat suits and gas masks, the fluoride had actually begun to burn a hole right through the concrete.

"It's a corrosive agent that the water treatment plant uses," said Rock Island assistant fire chief Jeff Yerkey, concerning the spilled fluoride. He explained that the crews had to use earthen berms, dirt, sand, and commercial broom equipment to stop the leak. Yerkey also added that there was no "inhalation hazard" from the incident, and no evacuation of local residents was required.

To see the full WQAD News 8 video report of the incident, which includes footage of hazmat workers being hosed off after the incident to ensure that no fluoride residues remained, visit:
http://www.wqad.com/news/rock-islan...

What is truly amazing about the incident is that this very same fluoride, which fire chief Yerkey specifically called a "corrosive agent," is deliberately added to drinking water supplies across the nation. This highly-toxic chemical that, when spilled, requires similar protective equipment as does a radioactive fallout situation, is being added to millions of Americans drinking water supplies every single day in the name of promoting health.

In reality, the events surrounding this fluoride spill are more than enough proof for any rationally-minded person that adding this poison to water supplies is a bad idea. Anything that requires the use of a protective suit and gas mask in order to handle -- and that burns a hole directly through concrete -- simply cannot be good for the body when ingested.

So I am a blogger now.

This is my entry into the world of blogging. Don't know if anyone will ever see it or care, but here it goes. I intend it be a humorous, music, sports and current issues flavored site with postings of links to my favorite videos, info about my favorite bands, stuff I find funny and things I find newsworthy. It might become political at times. I just can't help myself. I will also use this as a forum to put things out there for information and education sake. I like to expose people to alternative ways of viewing events both past and present. I never believe everything I read and don't claim to have all the answers despite what many of you who know me believe. Hence the title of my blog. I hope you enjoy it and feel free to pass on any comments.

Disclaimer:

Many of the articles I post here are taken from some of my favorite alternative news sites and blogs. I do my best to post the link to the the source of the original article as well as the author's name if it is provided. If someone notices any omission on my part or feels that they would prefer that I not post their articles here, please contact me. I try to post the work of others in bold and italics. My comments or any work that is original to me, is presented in regular type format. My intention is to pass on information I find interesting or important to others for informational and/or educational value. Again, if someone wishes that I not use their work, please contact me. I will gladly remove it and refrain from posting it in the future.